The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s handling of council tax matters in relation to a property rented by Mr X. This is because the tests in our Assessment Code are not met and, in relation to his own liability for council tax, he had appeal rights to the Valuation Tribunal which places the complaint outside our jurisdiction.
The complaint
Mr X complains about the Council’s handling of council tax matters in relation to a property he rents. He has made claims of mismanagement, potential fraud and data protection breaches.
The Ombudsman’s role and powers
The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint when someone has a right of appeal, reference or review to a tribunal about the same matter. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to expect the person to use this right. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(a), as amended) The Valuation Tribunal deals with appeals against decisions on council tax liability and council tax support or reduction.
We normally expect someone to refer the matter to the Information Commissioner if they have a complaint about data protection. However, we may decide to investigate if we think there are good reasons. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended) We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’, which we call ‘fault’. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint, which we call ‘injustice’. We provide a free service but must use public money carefully. We do not start or continue an investigation if we decide: there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating, or any fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained, or any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement, or we could not add to any previous investigation by the organisation, or further investigation would not lead to a different outcome, or we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants, or there is another body better placed to consider this complaint.
(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))
How I considered this complaint
I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council, including its response to the complaint.
I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
My assessment
Mr X complained to the Council about matters concerning council tax liability at the property he rents, including allegations in relation to its owner covering fraud and data breaches.
The Council responded to explain that had he wanted to challenge his own liability for council tax he could have appealed to the Valuation Tribunal. It also explained that it was unable to discuss the affairs of a third party with Mr X and that it had acted proportionately in seeking information from a company associated with the owner in establishing council tax liability.
Mr X’s concerns relate to his own council tax liability. As he had the right to challenge the Council’s decision on his liability by appealing to the Valuation Tribunal, a right we would reasonably have expected him to have used, this matter falls outside our jurisdiction and will not be investigated.
With regard to his allegations of fraud and criminal activities in relation to third parties, it is open to him to report such matters to the police and provide any evidence he has.
The Council has confirmed there has been no breach of his data but if Mr X believes otherwise, it is open to him to contact the Information Commissioner’s Office, the body best placed to deal with such matters.
Final decision
We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because the tests in our Assessment Code are not met and, in relation to his own liability for council tax, he had appeal rights to the Valuation Tribunal which places the complaint outside our jurisdiction.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman